SPEED vs CLASS?

[biyax]

“What is a fast time and does it differs from a “class” winning time?”

That question consistently is overlooked in this current age of “speed figures” (a concept many uses, but only a few understand).

Therefore to answer the above question it comes down to the answer being that a fast time is a nebulous metric which trumped is by winning class. The reason being is that history will show that the classiest of race horses didn’t always win in a fast time and it was usually because of pace, environmental conditions, or a combination of the two.

The conclusion here is that the great ones win with “class” and speed is a byproduct of class.

[Godspot]

So what you're saying is that Lightening Pearl should breeze passed this lot on official & racing post ratings?


2:45 GO AND GO ROUND TOWER STAKES (GROUP 3) (2yo) Winner €34,125 7 runners 6f Good ATR

HORSE OR TS RPR
Boris Grigoriev 8 b 99 104 110
Captain Obvious 53 — 41 99
Experience 8 99 105 112
Aaraas 64 93 99 108
An Ghalanta 8 t 97 104 111
Lady Pastrana 23 84 74 99
Lightening Pearl 21 107 68 120

[Godspot]

It's not impossible as my clear top rated's don't do too well here but 6/4 about a horse quite possibly flattered last time & that whopping rpr is mere conjecture imho & her 107 official rating the same, she has it all to prove:

2.45 1 GR3 2Y (110- RATING ODDS

Boris Grigoriev – clocked best CD but softer Gr3 tho? 128+8 4/1

An Ghalanta Improved Aug 11 - 120

Experience – CD, bf 117

Aaraas 114

Lightening Pearl 105 6/4f

Lady Pastrana 95

Captain Obvious is the interesting one!

[biyax]

hi gs, I don’t disagree with your response; however what I am saying is that to diminish a horse’s winning effort because of a “slow” time is not understanding the meaning of “class.”

[Godspot]

what I am saying is that to diminish a horse’s winning effort because of a “slow” time is not understanding the meaning of “class.”

Sorry Biyax but you can't pin that on me but I know a man who you can, lol

His name is Nick Mordin

& it's lucky as larry, that I chose the above race as an example....

As the aforementioned, Lightening Pearl surely did, 'breeze past' this lot....

&, clocked a decent time in the process!

A time on a par with her previous conqueror, A P O'Brien's, Maybe (near fav for 1,000G's) - albeit 2 furlongs apart this day, who, up until this day, I was struggling to get a decent figure for and dear old Mr Mordin, he's still struggling....

I recall he had the same problem with Sea The Stars, who he never quite got to grips with until it was all over....

It's a bit of a coincidence that I am putting forward his close relative & recent Listed first time out scorer, Born To Sea, as a cracking example for the title of this thread - SPEED VS CLASS

I see the Racing Post have given him a 78 Top Speed figure and 104 from the Racing Post Rating merchant -

It's a little handy & a coincidence that one of the beaten horses, Experience, in the above race, also ran (quite literally) behind Born To Sea on Saturday

[biyax]

Nice Read Godspot,

Class is a nonparametric variable and those type variables are never measurable, but are determined. There might be many factors used to determine class, but the 4 most salient factors are (1) distance, (2) weight, (3) pace/speed, and (4) style. In other words class is a function of the other 4 variables. I will add that class is always post race determined.

The late Phil Bull, the creator of Timeform ratings and time figures put together the best methodology in my opinion for the practical application of determining class.

STUPID NEWBIE

[Godspot]

Born To Sea A Star

May sound like the proverbial ‘bleeding obvious’ but I have put this together to show how I end up with a final rating of 109+ for his debut run

Actual vs Projected Ratings

I mean, I can only bang one figure into the machine (I’m using the Racing Post’s, ‘Own Ratings’ application at present) to determine the merit of an individual run.

I see Dave Edwards of the Racing Post’s Top Speed department has awarded Born To Sea 78 & the Rating Post Ratings, 104.
Bearing in mind there were two Group One races on the card, it would have been pretty amazing for an un-raced two-year-old to run the fastest race of the day.

78 doesn’t really tell us anything and leaves us somewhat in the dark as to the horses true ability and I think even the rpr’s 104 is slightly erring on the side of caution.

Let’s face it – there can hardly be anything more infuriating in this attempt to rate horses than to have a debutant or lightly raced improver come along and trounce your top rated horses in a moderate time and leave us all guessing to the true worth of the run.

How can we counter this anomaly and better gauge the merit that this run deserves? This is how it looked pre-race:

If I absolutely ‘Maxed-Out’ on the result – given that Experience clocked an improved 109 last time, assume that she didn’t quite run to that, put a 108 (see right hand column) next to her name and let the machine fill out the rest for pounds and lengths etc – Born To Sea ends up with a ‘projected’ 120, probably a tad high and over optimistic considering he only actually clocked 98 from me.

Actual Time – and this looks a tad low considering the consistent An Ghalanta who had clocked 104 in both her previous two runs.

In these circumstances I have of late been incorporating into my figures a ‘split the difference’ midway point between the two [98-120] and on this occasion, that equates to a mark of 109+ as below:-



This looks quite reasonable given the official marks of the 3rd & 4th, the only spanner being a 20lb improved effort by the 2nd but that could be down to her first experience of softish round.
Of course, if I’m wrong & Born To Sea doesn’t prove to be International Classification [110+ OR] worthy within his next couple of starts, I suppose I can just say it is something we should put down to experience.

[biyax]

Please state why the speed figure methodology is one of the accurate ways of placing any horse in the comparative context of greatness against each other? Also please make it both mathematically and statistically simplified; and sound enough for all to understand.

STUPID NEWBIE

[Godspot]

Crikey - I could write a book here! But let's face it, if I thought the Racing Post's speed figures were accurate, I would have put my feet up months ago but since starting out again, day-in day-day-out, all I learn is just how inaccurate they are:

Take Lord Windmark in the 2nd race at Listowel, he got a much improved 75 from me last time, yet after 5 runs the most he has got from the RP is 28

[biyax]

Crikey - I could write a book here!

No, it is not a requirement.

Speed figures at their best are based on one entity, speed with an attempt to determine the universal set of greatness with respect to a horse’s performance.

Therefore that is a good place to start. I remember that one commentator once said: “the media makes celebrity and time makes greatness.”

Paraphrasing and moving forward, speed figures are celebrated and greatness is determined. I am quite sure you understand that greatness can never be quantitated because it is non-parametric.

Better horses consistently run faster simply because they are “better” and their final times are as good a measurement of those efforts as any speed figures.

By the way the genesis behind speed figures were not to determine that “better” horses ran faster, but to determine when an appeared inferior time was “better” when all extenuating factors was taken into consideration.

Furthermore the “better” horses ran the fastest times in any era not because a speed figure calculation said so, but because of their inherent class which gave them the ability to perform “better.”

STUPID NEWBIE